Hello,

here are a few recommendations based on my reading 1.1 final and 2.0 preview.

1. Less exclamations, more explanations.

Each color box, each distinct paragraph is something like an exclamation mark to the eyes of a reader. Frequent highlights disrupt natural flow of reading and distract instead of focusing attention.

Use of multiple highlights per page is therefore recommended for 4-6 pages long technical manuals (or presentations), not for books.

Personal note: reading EABA 1.1 makes for frustrating experience, as base flow is continuously disrupted by "EXAMPLE", "ADVANCED" and other special paragraphs, moreover, the font face varies between these producing eventually disco effect.

Personal note II: the color boxes of 2.0 preview are less enticing than 1.1's special paragraphs. And are likely to look worse on black and white printouts.

Recommendation:
Drop all special formatting. Retain plain paragraphs. Read a book on layouting (suggested The Complete Manual of Typography by
James Felici).

2. If a rule needs an example, it is likely in need of refactoring. If a rule needs two examples (or more), then refactoring is a must.

By default, examples should not be needed. The information in the rule introduction should be sufficient to understand the rule.

Sample spread (pages 4.8 - 4.9): 8 examples, 3 advanced items, 5 standard paragraphs, 1 Note! paragraph, 1 "layers" paragraphs.

Personal note: this particular spread is the reason I have decided to write this post. The ratio of standard paragraphs to exclamations is too low.

Recommendation:
Avoid special paragraphs. If really necessary, resort to frames and sidebars. They exist for the very reason of preserving clarity of original message.

3. Stacked exceptions.

There are multiple rules, which build upon special cases (examples: sniping, sniping at moving target; layered armors; applying damage, applying damage to wounded targets, applying damage with called shots, applying damage... in other cases).
With so many exceptions, a table would be handier than standard, example-ridden text flow. An action flow diagram would be even better.

Here is another problem - the players often lack a copy of a manual. And so their familiarity with the system is going to be on lower level than that of GM. If in order to play a character one has to know about exceptions (for example, to adjudicate their own competence level before embarking upon perilous action), explaining rules is going to take a lot of fun away from a game.

This is a design issue, not a layouting one, however with a base flow being constantly broken by uneven formatting, learning these is much harder.

Recommendation:
Use sidebars or add a separate chapter for special/advanced cases.

4. Initiative.

The order of operations to determine sequence of actions goes as follows:
- the players argue who should do what
- the players argue with GM once they get to learn what the opposition does
- the dice are rolled, folks begin worrying about minor actions and dice pools, the GM begins adjudicating order of actions for this particular one second round for 12 different participants (say, 6 players and 6 opponents)

All of this just to plan beginning of one-second round. To be rendered obsolete the very next round.

Recommendation:
Establish alternative, optional and faster, method for sequencing actions for larger numbers of opinionated individuals.

--

Impressions based on my own reading of the manual for 1.1, 2.0 rule preview... and short informational presentation of 1.1 to prospective players.

Regards,
Ruemere

PS. Still reading the manual. It's not like I haven't read it once, though, truth to be told, I find it hard to keep focused on memorizing stuff.

I appreciate the comments and their depth, but I am hoping more people will chime in on the matter. As a matter of graphic design, it was actually highly recommended to generate visual breaks in the text, like the slight change in font size and indenting for examples. You are at the moment, one of only a few people in the past 15 years who has complained about that particular aspect of the rules formatting, so the hurdle to convince me to do a complete layout change is fairly high.

It may just be a personal design philosophy, but I've found that people can misinterpret even the simplest of rules, and having an example of how something is done in play can undo a lot of confusion later. As a real-world case, while the language seems clear and simple, perhaps even elegant, a few examples of what was meant by the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution would have saved a lot of people a lot of headaches...

From a conceptual and design standpoint, not everyone is going to want every rule, so some of them should clearly be optional. It seems that the best place to mention these rules is near the main rules for the topic being discussed. In the case of combat rules, there are so many special cases that there is an entire chapter that is just "advanced combat topics", but for the most part advanced or optional rules will be stuck in the relevant text.

That's sort of my current take on things. If we get some discussion rolling on this, I may put up a poll or two and see what happens.

For the record, I have no problem with a good useful rule having an example of two.

Not everything can be simplified to the point an example is not necessary, and sometimes an example is the best way to go.

Supplementary note

I've searched a bit for a manual type book with lots of examples and decent narrative flow. Unfortunately, most these found of them are not easily available for online viewing.

Fortunately, kind folks who made Eclipse Phase provide a great example of how to preserve lots of rules.

I don't know if the original rules are available online anymore, however if you have access to a copy, check page 115 (actual PDF page 117) and onwards.
Alternatively, if you look at Eclipse Phase Quick Start Rules, page 9 and forward, you'll be treated to similarly well organized flow.

The actual rules cut a clear path throughout the recommended passage, while the tables skulk around the text waiting to be digested at leisure. Examples cower politely meshing with background color motif, with the exception of catch-all bigger example on page 20.
The combat sequence (Quick Start), page 18, is well supported by short table immediately on the next page.

My immediate recommendations for EABA 2.0 would be:

1. Keep the main flow of narrative distinct, clean of special paragraphs. In other words: single font face, with allowances made for headers and bolded text.
The EABA 1.1 font does not really work well with italics-the cursive should be easier to recognize. I suppose one could consider using a different font, however current one looks very nice.
If I remember correctly, Paul Bourne was the guy who made cover page for EABA 1.1 - if he's the same guy who type set a|state (lambda | state) - an excellent game no less - you may want to ask him for a recommendation, as his work on the book is very good, and he also used a nice sans-serif fonts at that time.

2. Gather scattered examples together and put them in frames, divorcing frame content from rule flow. The examples and notes are of secondary importance. The reader should read them at their own pace, after concluding an important passage.

3. Try to keep all tables in one place to avoid page turning.

Regards,
Ruemere

PS. There is a problem with bolding text on the forum. To replicate:
Bold text.
Save.
Edit message.
Save.
Result: "b" in square brackets becomes "strong" in greater/less than symbols, and upon next save all formatting is lost.

I've got a|state kicking around here somewhere and I'll download the link you suggested. And I've noticed the formatting problem when you edit the posts. Still trying to track down and kill the problem.

edit: I've downloaded the Eclipse Phase quickstart and I'm not sure that's a good example for the things you say I shouldn't be doing. It pretty much does everything that I am doing, except a lot fancier. Which is cool, but not the style I'm trying to present (EABA has to read real easy on an iPad). Multiple fonts, multiple font sizes, multiple text colors, big notes in red or blue boxes (page 2 and 9), examples in colored text in boxes (page 12), and so on.

I do not want to be in the position of stepping on ruemere just because I disagree and/or it would be a lot of work to change things, but neither does a lone voice in the wilderness compel me to act.

Let me break the rules formatting down for any and all reading this:

rules text - gotta have it. Just need to make sure I am consistent with the heading and subheading types.

examples - I think they are necessary, that's unlikely to change. But sometimes an entire page is devoted to a particular rule or topic. In such cases would you prefer that all examples on that page be lumped together?

tables - should be the minimum necessary. Their placement? I tend to put them in the text near where the subject matter is. If there is more than one table on a page I could experiment with putting them all together. Any thoughts on that?

notes and advanced topics - This is an area where there might be some room for improvement. I am open to arguments as to why a particular advanced topic should not be an advanced topic, or why a particular note is part of the rules text that needs to be read and is not a side case that should be highlighted so that you can see where it starts and ends, so you can skip it if you want. Both notes and advanced topics that are mischaracterized will, when corrected, take a chunk of color off the page.

Re eclipse phase, I have and like the game myself, but I would not like to see eaba go in it's direction in tetrms of presentation. It's a monster to print out in terms of ink consumption and I've actually grown kind of fond of EABA's "Plain brown wrapper" style.

In a world where style seems to outweigh substance more and more every day in the majority opinion, I find a product that places the emphasis on substance quite refreshing.

I have to say that I tend to disagree with ruemere.

I find the color text boxes to be very useful. I know I can skip them on initial readings and it makes them easier to separate from the basic rules.

It's far too easy to have disagreements on the simplest and most plainly stated rules. Mostly caused by wishful thinking on the part of a player wanting to bend the rules...but often from honest misinterpretation. Examples are invaluable to illustrating the intent of the rule, as well as the specifics.

Layered rules, such as for sniping, etc. generally don't need a table. I agree those should be saved for much more complex topics. Tables generate a cluttered or complex feel to the rules.

While having a summary of the various tables at the end would be convenient, keep them in proximity to the rules involving them. There's little that's as irritating as having to flip back and forth between two sections of the rule book.

Different opinions are fine with me. I thought I'd share mine along with some examples.

Regarding fancier aspects of Eclipse Phase Quick Start rules:

- I am not recommending using graphic backgrounds or large number of font-faces for EABA 2.0. That's why I have listed page numbers to use as reference, and that's why I have been recommending use of plain paragraphs.

- If I were to voice my opinion on PDF documents in general, I would say that they are to be legible and usable first. Hence my concern with the flow. Graphics and special motifs tend to slow (or restrict) usage to stronger computers. At the same time, choice of right fonts is quite important.

--

If I were to list commercial products worthy of recommendation with regard to layout and editing... they would be:
- already mentioned James Felici's Complete Manual of Typography. The book lives by its rules.
- Paizo Publishing's Modules: these are very short adventure scenarios crammed with a lot of content. In order to fit everything together the editors do a lot of great work.
- already mentioned A|state. Paul Bourne.
- 4E manual, i.e. manual for 4th edition of D&D. Pertinent material is group together, and aspiring reader is free to jump 30 pages forward to avoid reading all special cases (i.e. power).

The key here, in my opinion, is to provide product easily digested. When you pick up a book, you read it differently from illustrated magazine. The content which breaks the flow of narrative is pushed aside (literally, into frames), so that the reader is free to pursue information at their pace.

Another example: imagine a novel you've read recently formatted with brightly colored boxes, and with numerous colorful intrusions.

Granted, a game guide is most definitely not a story, yet, at the same time, it does not have to be a technical manual. Would you enjoy reading washing machine assembly instruction 150 pages long?

That's why the rules should present themselves in a smooth flow, one after another, with exceptions, examples, table convenietly sliding to your side.

All of these are just recommendations based on my library, experience and opinions my players shared with me. Feel free to ignore them, however do remember that GM's perspective, or a perspective already familiar with the system is often quite different from casual reader (and potential player).

Regards,
Ruemere

I would say that examples are vital to the way I learn gaming rules. Typically 1) I skim the prose, 2) Read the example, 3) Go back the to rules and see how it explains what occurred in the example. Even when learning how character generation works, I usually start with a quick read, then move to the pregens and work backwards. Something I liked from EABA v1 was how the examples progressed in complexity step-by-step with the rules.

All that said, I do agree with ruemere that the coloured boxes in the midst of the text flow is somewhat jarring and prefer the more subtle approach in v1. It's a bit difficult to read the black-on-white text when my eyes keep on involuntarily jumping to the bright boxes. I'd prefer the examples, advanced rules, etc. be visually secondary to the main text - not so front-and-centre. I think the indent, the i ! symbols, and text-colour are enough, along with a noticeably smaller font-size.

I liked the old Century Gothic typeface as it gave EABA an identity and feel - though it seemed a bit anachronistic for Verne . I find the Verdana/Tahoma family of faces somewhat harder to read due to their extremely high x-height and lack of sufficient inherent leading. But I think you've got just enough leading.

Just a quick off-topic formatting question. I'm curious as to why EABA is always bolded throughout the text. For me, typographical emphasis indicates that the term is being introduced into the text for the first time; once I know what EABA is I don't need it emphasized any longer. I understand that bolding game titles has a long tradition in rpg manuals, I wonder how this started?